Laird
Member
The Donald Trump Thread
- Thread starter Michael2
- Start date
I'm a 'leftist' and I'm very glad he killed the TPP. I'm however fully unconvinced that he will replce that with anything better. There's still the fact that his cabinet is full of lobbyists and billionaires, his son in law got an advisory position (clear nepotism), he's bringing back the keystone and Dakota pipelines (environmentally speaking terrible news and it's time we left the Native American people alone), I already mentioned the anti-abortion executive order, looks like he might build that stupid wall (and Americans are gonna pay for it), and it looks like there will be even stronger checks and temporary ban of some sort on refugees claiming Aslyum in America - which I think is a terrible thing.
We also have him and his team lying about stupid stuff, like the numbers at the inauguration, and unfounded claims about millions of illegal and dead voters (if that was the case the election is illegitimate and needs to be rerun), there's also the question of why the Dems would rig the election to appear to win the popular vote, but not to win a few swing votes in rust belt states and win the actual election.
Those numbers
1) I have a problem with it - who are these organisations? What work are they doing? Surely it paves a way for similar executive orders in America?
2) It takes one sex to actually carry and have the baby, men can have a say sure, but sure they be trying to restrict and control whether women have abortions or not? It's easier to do that when you're not the one actually doing it.
3) I think the thing is historically white men have held power and have used it over minorities and women, this executive order is another example of that.
I find all of what Jim said concerning. Ordinary people don't win when corporation tax and regulations are cut. Also we shouldn't praise the extraction of natural gas, it's another non renewable that comes with large risks and consequences.
Poorer countries are coming from a much lower starting point, so slight increases in wage will be much larger as a percentage then richer countries.
Laird
Member
I want to comment on this [edit: Robbie posted again in the meantime; I was referring to his post on abortion] but I also don't want to derail this thread. Should we start a new thread on the (il)legitimacy of abortion, or are folks already too tired of this debate before it (re)starts?
Laird
Member
Maybe (probably!) I'm just not paying attention but where did Jim (in the post I quoted) mention cutting of corporation tax and regulations? [Edit: not to mention natural gas extraction - was that in Jim's article? If so, I don't remember it]
Yep. It would have been good to have had some absolute (USD-equivalent wages vs USD-equivalent wages) rather than relative (x% per year wage increases versus y% per year wage increases), but the sense I got (from that article) is that the absolutes are converging. Happy to be proved wrong by superior facts!
Laird
Member
Oh, I see that not only was it part of the article Jim referenced, but that Jim included that part within his quote. I agree, Robbie, that extraction of natural gas by fracking is unconscionable. Sorry I missed that in Jim's post.
From the article Jim shared and his comments after:
'Even as pay is rising rapidly in China, costs in America are falling. The successful extraction of natural gas from shale has dramatically lowered the price of energy.
...
I suspect Trump knew of this trend and is trying to take credit for it. Promising to cut corporate taxes and regulations is helping too, but that would most likely happen under any Republican administration.'
I dunno, but a 10% rise if say you're earning $2000 a year is $200, so you're now on $2200, say you're on $30000, half a percent would be $150, so now you're on $3150 and the actual change ($150) is barely different to $200.
I'd also like to add R.E Trump that this has somehow slipped under the radar, but 6 independent/freelance journalists - Aaron Cantú, Evan Engel, Alex Rubinstein, Matt Hopard, Shay Horse and Jack Keller - who were covering the Inauguration Day protests have been detained and face a 10 year prison sentence as well as a $25,000 fine. Nobody actually knows why, not least the journalists themselves, who haven't been given a reason for their arrest other than vague mentions of Washington anti-rioting law.
Source:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...-felonies-trump-inauguration-unrest?CMP=fb_gu
Source:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...-felonies-trump-inauguration-unrest?CMP=fb_gu
Laird
Member
Hence my (stated in the above quote) preference for absolute rather than relative wages. The article implied that these would be significant too, but we shouldn't settle for implication - hence my putting out there my openness to superior facts.
If you find any let me know - I've gotta get ready for work now!
malf
Member
Jeez. This is even worse than I expected. I can't wait to hear Bailey's defence of this.
David Bailey
Member
Well in an ideal world this would not be happening, but honestly, the 'Left' have ultimately responsibility for this, in that they should have stayed on traditional ground. I mean, if I were to vote on abortion, I would want it legal up until some limit - possibly determined by some concept of when consciousness might attach to the foetus. This issue isn't totally one-sided - it might be better if his opponents stopped their histrionics and discussed a reasonable compromise.
As the article makes clear, it isn't obvious if this will be extended into a ban on abortion within the US - I hope not. Also, as has already been noted, the President is more concerned with domestic issues, so there may be less government funded programs abroad anyway.
However, Trump has effectively allowed the Syrian war to be wound up, whereas Hillary would have perpetuated that war, doing enormous additional harm to Syrians, and putting us all in grave danger. On balance Trump is definitely a force for good.
For the record, I am 100% with him on:
1) Getting agreement with the Russians, and stopping interfering in the rest of the World. I hope at some point he can also start scaling back NATO.
2) Ending the 'climate change' farce. Since a continuing reliance on fossil fuels (obtained locally) means pumping and transporting fuel, I am also with him on the building of pipelines. When oil and gas are transported by rail, horrible accidents are inevitable.
3) Getting back full control of the US borders.
4) Excluding immigrants from countries harbouring significant numbers of Islamic militants.
5) Removing the observance of PC speech.
6) Getting jobs back to the country.
7) Cracking down on law and order. Incidentally, far more blacks are killed by other blacks than those killed by the police. Obviously murders committed by the police need to be prosecuted, but you should ask yourself how you would like to police some of the tough areas in Chicago! The way to cut deaths from police is clearly to cut the level of crime, so that the police feel less jittery (they are human beings too). Obviously I would also introduce gun control, but not even Obama managed to do that.
8) Eliminating ISIS - I don't know what else you can do with a group that rejoice when one of their members run down women and children in the street, or enter a convert venue and start shooting the audience one by one. Maybe some will surrender, but my guess is that a lot will just fight on to the bitter end. If the US under Obama and Hillary Clinton had anything to do with the creation of ISIS, I hope this is fully revealed, and those responsible are prosecuted.
9) Hopefully he will leave the laws on Gays and Lesbians as they are, but I would be very much more cautious about the trans-gender program - for reasons I have already discussed.
David
Typoz
Member
This may not be answerable.
There was some research, along similar lines to past-life regression, where people were able to recall at what point their own conscious entered the body. There was no fixed result. It included at one extreme, being present from conception, to at the other, entering after physical birth had taken place. There were also some, if I recall correctly, where the consciousness popped in and out during the development, so there was neither a precise 'moment' nor even a general trend as to when it took place.
The whole subject raises far more questions than there are answers.
lhl
Member
Does anyone know what Trumps intends regarding the state of emergency that was declared after 9/11 and has been upheld since then, first by Bush and subsequently by Obama?
Your ability to blame 'the left' for everything continues to astound me!
1) Largely agree.
2) Could not disagree more on this point, I actually find climate change deniel irresponsible and a little dangerous.
3) They already control their borders.
4) I think the threat of this issue is largely overrated, is used to generate fear in order to create control over people, and I think banning immigration from certain countries is basically Xenophobia.
5) A lot of what you and others think is 'PC' is just being nice and respectful about others. In addition to this point, just because people 'feel' and want to say something, doesn't make it acceptable or true.
6) We will see on this one - will they be properly paid jobs?
7) America is already very 'tough on crime' (an example being the so called 'war on drugs), it isn't working, alleviation of poverty and a rehabilitation based justice system - like in Scandinavian countries which have lower poverty, lower inequality, and much lower reoffending rates. Why not do what works instead of continuing to 'crack down' on crime.
8) Let's see what happens here I guess.
9) We don't agree about the transgender issue, I wonder how many transgender people you know or have met? I hope he leaves LGBT people alone too - though we shouldn't be having leaders where there is any risk to groups that are already marginalised and have historically had a pretty tough time.
Cheers!
Max_B
Member
Again, they are clearly stating that this is the very thing they are not going to do.
The current administration clearly state that they believe the problems they've seen are due to not enough engagement from the USA. They are going to remove military spending caps, and massively increase spending on equipment, and increase recruitment. Rex said at his hearing that they are going to confront China in the South China Sea. There will be more interventions, and these will be overtly USA interventions, not via proxies. They clearly state that the USA must be respected again, and will achieve this by stronger assertions of its strength, not weaker ones.
Thailand, Indonesia & Philippines are next to explode (China's import & export route via the South China Sea). Piracy has gone through the roof in this region, this is now the worlds piracy hotspot, and the ISIS presence is growing, I'd expect disruption by ISIS to flare up there within the next 18 months. China is trying to quickly reinforce it's presence here, because of its importance. Indonesia is buying large quantities of military equipment, and seems to be stipulating that such equipment needs to be able to be delivered quicky (2 years), and contracts are being placed on that basis. They don't seem to be able to wait, for some reason.
Silence
Member
This is a bold, sweeping comment that is not supported by economists. There is no consensus one way or the other on whether de-regulation and lower corporate taxes helps or hurts ordinary, working people. Its debatable.
I'm cherry picking one thing here, but this thread seems to be growing chock full of absolute statements on a wide range of things where there simply are not absolute answers.
Your first paragraph contradicts itself, my statement isn't backed by economists, but there's a big debate about it?
I should have said 'in my opinion' in that case, I think it depends on what type of regulation, and what your political beliefs are in terms of taxation.
Of all the crazy statements on this forum though, as if that one of mine is the one you single out!